Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If you are looking for clarity about what’ll happen in the Eur

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited May 15 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If you are looking for clarity about what’ll happen in the Euros then you won’t get it from the latest polls

One of the common criticisms of pollsters in recent years is that they have a tendency to herd particularly as we get closer to elections. Well for sure that’s one thing that isn’t happening this time. With just a week and one day to go the above chart shows the Brexit party lead in the most recent polls and as can be seen there is a huge gap between the figures from YouGov and those from ComRes just out this morning.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,259
    First :smiley:
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 27,709
    edited May 15
    Another Change UK candidate has ended their campaign and endorsed the Lib Dems, this time in Scotland.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48281672
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,891
    edited May 15
    Third. like Labour, or maybe the LDs. Or maybe even BP or the Greens. Oh I don't know.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,487
    @RobD ... that would be eighth in the Highworth Parish Council results .... who have a rich electoral history spanning back well over two centuries :

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,414
    FPT
    Cyclefree said:


    It is curious that when extreme conservatives come to power often their very first act is to limit women's freedoms. See Iran, for instance. Why are conservative men so afraid of women being free?

    I think that’s an unfair use of the term “conservative” in the second sentence Fundamentalist would be better

    The answer is that their religious texts reflect the social landscape of when they were written (you only have to compare Romans to the Pentateuch to see the impact of time)

    Fundamentalists build their appeal on simplistic calls to go back to a past when everything was peachy. Subjugating women - based on 4,000 year old texts - is a highly visible demonstration of compliance.

    It also wins them credit from the many social and intellectual inadequates in their ranks

    (You could have summarised the above as “playing to their base”)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 53,591
    "ComRes had 60% of its sample rating their likelihood to vote at between 8 to 10."

    Just a theory but I'd guess people inclined to fill out opinion polls on politics are more likely to head out and vote than those that don't.

    "My view is that it’s not going to happen and am betting on overall turnout in the 30-40 range,"

    I suggest that BOTH 54% of the Comres poll fillers and ~35% of the General electorate may well vote.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 23,334
    AndyJS said:

    Another Change UK candidate has ended their campaign and endorsed the Lib Dems, this time in Scotland.



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48281672

    They are all unknown non-entities, no-one has ever heard of these dumplings.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,060
    FPT @Mysticrose signing an online petition is like clicking "Like" on YouTube.

    Voting means choosing people to rule you.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,414
    FPT
    Animal_pb said:


    The problem with that (a position I struggle to improve on, I must admit), is that medical science keeps pushing back the point at which a pregnancy can be 'viable'. When we finally invent artificial wombs, it could be very early indeed.

    That's why I approach it as a question of rights.

    If a child is viable independent of the mother at - say - 10 weeks, then why should the mother be allowed to terminate its life?

    Equally, if the child is not viable then I can see an argument that the mother's rights have more sway because otherwise the mother is being forced to provide a "service" to the child

    If it were up to me, I'd legislate that abortion is legal up to the age of viability and then ask the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority to determine what that age is, with a provision that they review the matter every 10 years to keep up with medical science.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,729
    > @Pulpstar said:

    > I suggest that BOTH 54% of the Comres poll fillers and ~35% of the General electorate may well vote.

    Yes, but will the 54% of the poll fillers be representative of the 35% of voters? I have my doubts...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 59,575
    Locally yes the Tories were very active in the locals but doing barely anything for the Euros and same goes for the other parties, it is an almost completely mailshot campaign with some Brexit Party rallies added on.

    However I think some Brexiteers who abstained in the locals this year will turn out and vote Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections
  • stodgestodge Posts: 5,525
    Afternoon all :)

    Notwithstanding the huge volatility and divergence in the polls currently, the more substantial question is whether we are seeing a rare seismic shift in public opinion or is this a brief hiatus with normal service to be resumed later.

    Since 2010, we saw first the collapse of the LDs from their previous levels in the high teens - low twenties down to low single figures which coincided with the emergence of UKIP which basically took the previous LD place in the polls for a short while. With the demise of UKIP and the Referendum politics polarised around the traditional Conservative/Labour duopoly which polled 84% between them in 2017.

    From 2016 until early last year, a number of factors held that arrangement in place. One was Jeremy Corbyn and the other was the belief/expectation/hope Theresa May would deliver on her commitment to take us out of the EU at the end of the 24 month A50 process. The b/e/h started on the idea of a Deal/WA and gradually coalesced toward leaving without a Deal or WA. To just leave irrespective of the consequences became the opinion of a substantial minority.

    May would not or could not go down that road - the guidance she was given must have clearly demonstrated the scale of the economic dislocation likely to follow the UK leaving the EU without a WA. Consequently, she argued for one extension in a final desperate attempt to get the WA through the Commons but when that failed she was forced to go for a longer extension and the house of cards built on sand that had been her voting coalition disintegrated.

    Corbyn and Labour too have problems and with a pro-LEAVE leader and a pro-REMAIN membership Labour's vote is under pressure so for the first time in my political life we have both sides of the duopoly being threatened existentially and simultaneously. When I was an activist the hope was always for re-alignment on the Left with the Alliance replacing Labour as the main opposition to the Conservatives. Now we see the very real possibility of the Brexit Party supplanting the Conservatives on the centre-right (I still think it unlikely).

    May remains however and desperately clings to the WA as her one way out (which it is) and we are noe seeing another power play from the beleaguered PM threatening Revoke as an option if the WA is defeated. She will know there is no majority in the Commons for Revoke or for No Deal but for the latter that doesn't matter as it remains the default position if nothing else gets a majority in the Commons.

    At the moment, we still have three options - Revoke, pass the WA or leave without a WA. If the middle option ends, what will or would be the political ramifications of Revoke vs No Deal? What if Revoke wins? What if neither win and we leave without a WA on 31/10?
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192
    Pulpstar said:

    "ComRes had 60% of its sample rating their likelihood to vote at between 8 to 10."



    Just a theory but I'd guess people inclined to fill out opinion polls on politics are more likely to head out and vote than those that don't.



    "My view is that it’s not going to happen and am betting on overall turnout in the 30-40 range,"



    I suggest that BOTH 54% of the Comres poll fillers and ~35% of the General electorate may well vote.

    That sounds perfectly plausible to me.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,114
    > @Charles said:
    > FPT
    > The problem with that (a position I struggle to improve on, I must admit), is that medical science keeps pushing back the point at which a pregnancy can be 'viable'. When we finally invent artificial wombs, it could be very early indeed.
    >
    > That's why I approach it as a question of rights.
    >
    > If a child is viable independent of the mother at - say - 10 weeks, then why should the mother be allowed to terminate its life?
    >
    > Equally, if the child is not viable then I can see an argument that the mother's rights have more sway because otherwise the mother is being forced to provide a "service" to the child
    >
    > If it were up to me, I'd legislate that abortion is legal up to the age of viability and then ask the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority to determine what that age is, with a provision that they review the matter every 10 years to keep up with medical science.

    There are other questions as well: many early term 'viable' babies have significant health issues, and that 'viability' is only there because of massive medical intervention.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,729
    > @stodge said:
    > Afternoon all :)
    >
    > At the moment, we still have three options - Revoke, pass the WA or leave without a WA. If the middle option ends, what will or would be the political ramifications of Revoke vs No Deal? What if Revoke wins? What if neither win and we leave without a WA on 31/10?

    We still have the fourth option: Delay.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 59,575
    > @stodge said:
    > Afternoon all :)
    >
    > Notwithstanding the huge volatility and divergence in the polls currently, the more substantial question is whether we are seeing a rare seismic shift in public opinion or is this a brief hiatus with normal service to be resumed later.
    >
    > Since 2010, we saw first the collapse of the LDs from their previous levels in the high teens - low twenties down to low single figures which coincided with the emergence of UKIP which basically took the previous LD place in the polls for a short while. With the demise of UKIP and the Referendum politics polarised around the traditional Conservative/Labour duopoly which polled 84% between them in 2017.
    >
    > From 2016 until early last year, a number of factors held that arrangement in place. One was Jeremy Corbyn and the other was the belief/expectation/hope Theresa May would deliver on her commitment to take us out of the EU at the end of the 24 month A50 process. The b/e/h started on the idea of a Deal/WA and gradually coalesced toward leaving without a Deal or WA. To just leave irrespective of the consequences became the opinion of a substantial minority.
    >
    > May would not or could not go down that road - the guidance she was given must have clearly demonstrated the scale of the economic dislocation likely to follow at had been her voting coalition disintegrated.
    >
    > Corbyn and Labour too have problems and with a pro-LEAVE leader and a pro-REMAIN membership Labour's vote is under pressure so for the first time in my political life we have both sides of the duopoly being threatened existentially and simultaneously. When I was an activist the hope was always for re-alignment on the Left with the Alliance replacing Labour as the main opposition to the Conservatives. Now we see the very real possibility of the Brexit Party supplanting the Conservatives on the centre-right (I still think it unlikely).
    >
    > May remains however and desperately clings to the WA as her one way out (which it is) and we are noe seeing another power play from the beleaguered PM threatening Revoke as an option if the WA is defeated. She will know there is no majority in the Commons for Revoke or for No Deal but for the latter that doesn't matter as it remains the default position if nothing else gets a majority in the Commons.
    >
    > At the moment, we still have three options - Revoke, pass the WA or leave without a WA. If the middle option ends, what will or would be the political ramifications of Revoke vs No Deal? What if Revoke wins? What if neither win and we leave without a WA on 31/10?

    If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 19,221
    Whatever you think of Farage, and I happen to think he is a ******* ******** *** ***** ****, he us undoubtedly a fantastic political operator.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 5,525
    And I'm left with the opinion aspect of it all - the longer May stays in Downing Street, the stronger TBP gets and the very real risk of a substantial schism grows. Why stay in a Party polling 20% when I can join a Party polling 30%+ which most of my association supports anyway might be the line of thought for some backbench MPs.

    It seems to this observer however TBP, irrespective of its crystal clear view on the EU, has a lot of work to do on other socio-economic issues. Will liberal conservatives be shunted out by a more aggressively populist social conservative grouping which might for example advocate restoration of the death penalty as a manifesto pledge as well as hugely stringent anti-immigration measures?

    The other side is what happens to Labour post-Corbyn - would a new leader, doubtless initially basking in the approval of Islington Man, seek to bring Labour back toward a more centrist position courting LDs and liberal conservatives too? History probably isn't that symmetrical.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 642
    Charles said:

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:


    It is curious that when extreme conservatives come to power often their very first act is to limit women's freedoms. See Iran, for instance. Why are conservative men so afraid of women being free?

    I think that’s an unfair use of the term “conservative” in the second sentence Fundamentalist would be better

    The answer is that their religious texts reflect the social landscape of when they were written (you only have to compare Romans to the Pentateuch to see the impact of time)

    Fundamentalists build their appeal on simplistic calls to go back to a past when everything was peachy. Subjugating women - based on 4,000 year old texts - is a highly visible demonstration of compliance.

    It also wins them credit from the many social and intellectual inadequates in their ranks

    (You could have summarised the above as “playing to their base”)
    Cyclefree, you are describing people as 'extreme conservatives' and then sounding surprised when they do extremely extremist conservative things. The clue is in your name for these dreadful people who BTW should not be confused with the Burkean, Peelite, Parrisian or Clarkeian versions of conservatism.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,683
    FPT
    "It's all rubbish anyway. If anyone in the Tory party had any balls they would say that No Deal was never the basis on which either the referendum was won or the election.
    If that is the way some voters want to go then this will need to be put to a vote, either at a GE or in a referendum. But it will not be the policy of the Tory party.
    If individual tories want to turn themselves into a single issue Brexit party, let them leave and join it. Or if they allow themselves to break taken over by Farage and co, let old-style liberal Tories join the Lib Dems (Change UK having proved to be an utter waste of space).
    The rest of us will have to enjoy the delights of a Corbyn government unchecked by pesky EU rules. I will have to dig out my old passport with its stamps at the back graciously allowing me to take £50 out of the country to go on holiday."

    Huzzah for Cyclefree.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 127
    Flatmate and mother received Green Party leaflets this week. They're done as a letter from Caroline Lucas, who isn't the party leader. They don't mention the actual party leaders, Sian Berry and Jonathan Bartley. And we're in Sian Berry's ward. Berry is our local councillor. What was the point of moving the leadership away from Lucas if the party is going to act as if Lucas is still leader?
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192
    edited May 15
    HYUFD said:




    If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart

    My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,960
    > @isam said:
    > If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart
    >
    > My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero

    MPs don't imprison people, Sam.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,827
    > @HYUFD said:
    > Locally yes the Tories were very active in the locals but doing barely anything for the Euros and same goes for the other parties, it is an almost completely mailshot campaign with some Brexit Party rallies added on.
    >
    > However I think some Brexiteers who abstained in the locals this year will turn out and vote Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections

    Broadly agree. We're doing a bit in Surrey Labour, but the sheer size of the constituencies is a deterrent, quite apart from anything else - the feeling that if you knocked on another 100 doors it would affect the result is hard to summon up. Which is of course a problem of PR, which to be meaningful needs large constituencies to even things out.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,891
    > @bondegezou said:
    > Flatmate and mother received Green Party leaflets this week. They're done as a letter from Caroline Lucas, who isn't the party leader. They don't mention the actual party leaders, Sian Berry and Jonathan Bartley. And we're in Sian Berry's ward. Berry is our local councillor. What was the point of moving the leadership away from Lucas if the party is going to act as if Lucas is still leader?
    Cos she's the only one anybody's heard of?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,729
    > @bondegezou said:
    > Flatmate and mother received Green Party leaflets this week. They're done as a letter from Caroline Lucas, who isn't the party leader. They don't mention the actual party leaders, Sian Berry and Jonathan Bartley. And we're in Sian Berry's ward. Berry is our local councillor. What was the point of moving the leadership away from Lucas if the party is going to act as if Lucas is still leader?

    If Lucas is the best figurehead to use for the leaflets, but doesn't want the burden of being the leader, then it seems like the perfect arrangement. Far better than the more egotistical behaviour of leaders that are sometimes seen with other parties.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 1,816
    TGOHF said:
    Smart move by Corbyn. It would save the Conservative Party from extinction while condemning the Labour Party to implode.

    Oh, wait.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,414

    > @Charles said:

    > FPT

    > The problem with that (a position I struggle to improve on, I must admit), is that medical science keeps pushing back the point at which a pregnancy can be 'viable'. When we finally invent artificial wombs, it could be very early indeed.

    >

    > That's why I approach it as a question of rights.

    >

    > If a child is viable independent of the mother at - say - 10 weeks, then why should the mother be allowed to terminate its life?

    >

    > Equally, if the child is not viable then I can see an argument that the mother's rights have more sway because otherwise the mother is being forced to provide a "service" to the child

    >

    > If it were up to me, I'd legislate that abortion is legal up to the age of viability and then ask the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority to determine what that age is, with a provision that they review the matter every 10 years to keep up with medical science.



    There are other questions as well: many early term 'viable' babies have significant health issues, and that 'viability' is only there because of massive medical intervention.

    Yes - but I see that as a technical rather than a moral or political question which is why it is better to have an independent body determine it.
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192

    > @isam said:

    > If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart

    >

    > My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero



    MPs don't imprison people, Sam.

    True, I should have said the establishment.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 3,213
    > @TOPPING said:
    > Whatever you think of Farage, and I happen to think he is a ******* ******** *** ***** ****, he us undoubtedly a fantastic political operator.

    Only in the sense that he knows how to generate faux injustices and appeal to people's insecurities and paranoia. There have been several people who have written rule books on this that he has followed.
    Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were the two genuine fantastic political operators of my time, but they both actually held and exercised power. Hopefully El Duce Nige doesn't get the chance to demonstrate his limited capability in that regard.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 20,949
    > @El_Capitano said:
    > Is the game afoot ?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Smart move by Corbyn. It would save the Conservative Party from extinction while condemning the Labour Party to implode.
    >
    > Oh, wait.

    Would probably take a bit of wind out of the Brexit party sails - but give not enough time for the Con vote to recover.

    Plus those that have already voted..
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,893
    > @TOPPING said:
    > Whatever you think of Farage, and I happen to think he is a ******* ******** *** ***** ****, he us undoubtedly a fantastic political operator.

    Is he fantastic or is his opposition just total crap ?

    I find myself in the position of hold my nose and vote since the so called "sensible" parties havent shown any ability to engage with large slices of the electorate.
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192
    So patronising it could have come from the group people used to call the TIGgers

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,893
    @TSE

    you will be relieved to know I got an election leaflet from Labour and now have the chance to vote for Sion Simon as my MEP
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 15,162
    Just had my second leaflet in the post - This time from (NO) Change UK! :D
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 3,213
    > @williamglenn said:
    > > @isam said:
    > > If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart
    > >
    > > My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero
    >
    > MPs don't imprison people, Sam.

    They might do in El Duce Nige's Brexitopia.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 11,948
    > @isam said:
    > So patronising it could have come from the group people used to call the TIGgers
    >
    >

    Trouble is, he's not wrong. Let's hope Farage's current turn in the spotlight is his last hurrah.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,683
    Any of our military/foreign policy types have any idea what's going on with the US and Iran right now ?

    Spain pulling out of the US naval force in the Gulf over 'policy differences', and now this...
    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/15/us-embassy-iraq-evacuation-1324931

    Feels ominous.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,414

    > @bondegezou said:

    > Flatmate and mother received Green Party leaflets this week. They're done as a letter from Caroline Lucas, who isn't the party leader. They don't mention the actual party leaders, Sian Berry and Jonathan Bartley. And we're in Sian Berry's ward. Berry is our local councillor. What was the point of moving the leadership away from Lucas if the party is going to act as if Lucas is still leader?



    If Lucas is the best figurehead to use for the leaflets, but doesn't want the burden of being the leader, then it seems like the perfect arrangement. Far better than the more egotistical behaviour of leaders that are sometimes seen with other parties.

    Sometimes?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,893
    > @williamglenn said:
    > > @isam said:
    > > If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart
    > >
    > > My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero
    >
    > MPs don't imprison people, Sam.

    They pass the laws that do.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,683
    > @Alanbrooke said:
    > @TSE
    >
    > you will be relieved to know I got an election leaflet from Labour and now have the chance to vote for Sion Simon as my MEP

    "Shortly, there will be an election...."
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 127
    > @Charles said:
    > FPT
    > The problem with that (a position I struggle to improve on, I must admit), is that medical science keeps pushing back the point at which a pregnancy can be 'viable'. When we finally invent artificial wombs, it could be very early indeed.
    >
    > That's why I approach it as a question of rights.
    >
    > If a child is viable independent of the mother at - say - 10 weeks, then why should the mother be allowed to terminate its life?
    >
    > Equally, if the child is not viable then I can see an argument that the mother's rights have more sway because otherwise the mother is being forced to provide a "service" to the child
    >
    > If it were up to me, I'd legislate that abortion is legal up to the age of viability and then ask the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority to determine what that age is, with a provision that they review the matter every 10 years to keep up with medical science.

    Why is viability the important moment? If science advances and we can bring a blastocyst to full term outside a real uterus, it would still only be a blastocyst. Why should a microscopic ball of cells have any rights?

    I think more understanding of biology is appropriate here. Around 50% or more of all fertilisation events do not make it to full term, most through a failure to implant in the uterine wall, passing from the woman's body entirely unnoticed. If a person is "created" at the moment of fertilisation, then should women be doing genetic tests on their menses to check whether they've missed a tragic death? Is heaven full of blastocysts lying on clouds? Of course not. Blastocysts are not people, regardless of whether one day we can grow them outside a womb. We don't treat blastocysts as people in any other way, we don't mourn their "deaths", so we shouldn't pretend they're people in law.

    Why not make the judgement based on the stage of development? A foetus at 10 weeks is not a person. The basic brain regions have begun to form, but there's nothing remotely like a functioning brain.

    More understanding of history is also required! Try watching https://www.kindtowomen.com/ about what it was like when abortion was illegal in the UK.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,893
    > @Nigelb said:
    > > @Alanbrooke said:
    > > @TSE
    > >
    > > you will be relieved to know I got an election leaflet from Labour and now have the chance to vote for Sion Simon as my MEP
    >
    > "Shortly, there will be an election...."

    Arf!
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 3,213
    > @isam said:
    > > @isam said:
    >
    > > If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart
    >
    > >
    >
    > > My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero
    >
    >
    >
    > MPs don't imprison people, Sam.
    >
    > True, I should have said the establishment.

    Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?

    Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 53,591
    > @Nigelb said:
    > Any of our military/foreign policy types have any idea what's going on with the US and Iran right now ?
    >
    > Spain pulling out of the US naval force in the Gulf over 'policy differences', and now this...
    > https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/15/us-embassy-iraq-evacuation-1324931
    >
    > Feels ominous.

    War with Eye ran to boost the Donald's polling ?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 11,948
    > @Nigel_Foremain said:
    > > @isam said:
    > > > @isam said:
    > >
    > > > If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart
    > >
    > > >
    > >
    > > > My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > MPs don't imprison people, Sam.
    > >
    > > True, I should have said the establishment.
    >
    > Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?
    >
    > Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.

    Well said. It's yet another Brexit lie.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,960
    > @Pulpstar said:
    >
    > War with Eye ran to boost the Donald's polling ?

    Not much sign of a 'special relationship' either.

  • isamisam Posts: 27,192
    edited May 15


    Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?



    Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.

    The political establishment of the last 20 years.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,414

    > @Charles said:

    > FPT

    > The problem with that (a position I struggle to improve on, I must admit), is that medical science keeps pushing back the point at which a pregnancy can be 'viable'. When we finally invent artificial wombs, it could be very early indeed.

    >

    > That's why I approach it as a question of rights.

    >

    > If a child is viable independent of the mother at - say - 10 weeks, then why should the mother be allowed to terminate its life?

    >

    Equally, if the child is not viable then I can see an argument that the mother's rights have more sway because otherwise the mother is being forced to provide a "service" to the child



    If it were up to me, I'd legislate that abortion is legal up to the age of viability and then ask the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority to determine what that age is, with a provision that they review the matter every 10 years to keep up with medical science.



    Why is viability the important moment? If science advances and we can bring a blastocyst to full term outside a real uterus, it would still only be a blastocyst. Why should a microscopic ball of cells have any rights?



    I think more understanding of biology is appropriate here. Around 50% or more of all fertilisation events do not make it to full term, most through a failure to implant in the uterine wall, passing from the woman's body entirely unnoticed. If a person is "created" at the moment of fertilisation, then should women be doing genetic tests on their menses to check whether they've missed a tragic death? Is heaven full of blastocysts lying on clouds? Of course not. Blastocysts are not people, regardless of whether one day we can grow them outside a womb. We don't treat blastocysts as people in any other way, we don't mourn their "deaths", so we shouldn't pretend they're people in law.



    Why not make the judgement based on the stage of development? A foetus at 10 weeks is not a person. The basic brain regions have begun to form, but there's nothing remotely like a functioning brain.



    More understanding of history is also required! Try watching https://www.kindtowomen.com/ about what it was like when abortion was illegal in the UK.

    You need to decide when a foetus acquires the rights of a human. At the moment we have a more or less arbitrary date.

    Viability - I think you may have interpreted my post as relating to fertilisation or implantation? - is when a foetus can survive (with medical support) independent of the mother. If that is the case why should it not have rights?

    (I’m not a doctor, but I think it’s around 20/21 weeks on current science vs 24 weeks as the legal cut off)
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 3,213
    > @isam said:
    > Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?
    >
    >
    >
    > Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.
    >
    > The political establishment of the last 20 years.

    Boris The Idiot and Rees-Mogg, and for that matter Farridge ARE very much part of the 20 year old political Establishment. You don't get much more Establishment than being (or wannabe, as was failure Farage) a Tory MP FFS!
  • ah009ah009 Posts: 436
    > @isam said:
    > The political establishment of the last 20 years.

    Ahhh, you're talking about Iain Duncan Smith
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 3,213
    > @ah009 said:
    > > @isam said:
    > > The political establishment of the last 20 years.
    >
    > Ahhh, you're talking about Iain Duncan Smith

    haha. Yes another interesting one. An anti-establishment ex-British Army Officer . It is hilarious.
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192

    > @isam said:

    > Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?

    >

    >

    >

    > Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.

    >

    > The political establishment of the last 20 years.



    Boris The Idiot and Rees-Mogg, and for that matter Farridge ARE very much part of the 20 year old political Establishment. You don't get much more Establishment than being (or wannabe, as was failure Farage) a Tory MP FFS!

    Giving your opponents silly names might be mildly amusing once, but more than that it just seems contrived and unfunny, when debating.

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,729
    > @El_Capitano said:
    > Is the game afoot ?
    >
    >
    >
    > Smart move by Corbyn. It would save the Conservative Party from extinction while condemning the Labour Party to implode.
    >
    > Oh, wait.

    Second Reading is not passing the Bill. There would still be amendments and Third Reading to come.

    Allowing the Bill to pass Second Reading could keep May in post for several more weeks, giving plenty of opportunities for Tory infighting over amendments and delaying the moment at which a new leader has the chance to do things differently.

    Then, either Labour gets the amendments it wants passed (unlikely) or they can still vote against at Third Reading.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,309
    edited May 15
    > @Scott_P said:
    >
    >
    >

    If I had a pound for every "very significant" or "potentially very significant" Brexit development...
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,891
    Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 3,213
    > @isam said:
    > > @isam said:
    >
    > > Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > The political establishment of the last 20 years.
    >
    >
    >
    > Boris The Idiot and Rees-Mogg, and for that matter Farridge ARE very much part of the 20 year old political Establishment. You don't get much more Establishment than being (or wannabe, as was failure Farage) a Tory MP FFS!
    >
    > Giving your opponents silly names might be mildly amusing once, but more than that it just seems contrived and unfunny, when debating.

    In your opinion. I believe it adds a little light heartedness, which might be required. OK, let's remove the light heartedness. The suggestion that the leading "thinkers" (use that word advisedly) for Brexit are anti-Establishment or even non-Establishment is cretinous beyond belief, as it does not stand even the most cursory scrutiny of the most pea-brained Brexit voter.
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192
    edited May 15


    In your opinion. I believe it adds a little light heartedness, which might be required. OK, let's remove the light heartedness. The suggestion that the leading "thinkers" (use that word advisedly) for Brexit are anti-Establishment or even non-Establishment is cretinous beyond belief, as it does not stand even the most cursory scrutiny of the most pea-brained Brexit voter.

    Ooh nasty 🤣
  • BromBrom Posts: 1,578
    > @Nigel_Foremain said:
    > > @isam said:
    > > Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.
    > >
    > > The political establishment of the last 20 years.
    >
    > Boris The Idiot and Rees-Mogg, and for that matter Farridge ARE very much part of the 20 year old political Establishment. You don't get much more Establishment than being (or wannabe, as was failure Farage) a Tory MP FFS!

    I don't know if you're joking but not everyone who goes to private school is part of the establishment. I went to a state school but don't have a chip on my shoulder like yourself regarding those who received a decent education. Politicians should be judged on their actions and how capable they are of interacting with the electorate rather than decisions taken by their parents.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 127
    > @NickPalmer said:
    > Broadly agree. We're doing a bit in Surrey Labour, but the sheer size of the constituencies is a deterrent, quite apart from anything else - the feeling that if you knocked on another 100 doors it would affect the result is hard to summon up. Which is of course a problem of PR, which to be meaningful needs large constituencies to even things out.

    IIRC, the allocation of the final MEP in South East England last time round was decided by 17 votes. 17 votes less and there would have been one more UKIP and one less LibDem MEP.

    So, go knock on those doors! (But not for Labour and their complete lack of a policy on Brexit.)
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,891
    > @Nigel_Foremain said:
    > > @ah009 said:
    > > > @isam said:
    > > > The political establishment of the last 20 years.
    > >
    > > Ahhh, you're talking about Iain Duncan Smith
    >
    > haha. Yes another interesting one. An anti-establishment ex-British Army Officer . It is hilarious.

    Yes. You can't get much more anti-establishment than a former leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party.
    His entire career has been dedicated to overturning the system on behalf of those without privilege.
  • BromBrom Posts: 1,578
    > @Alanbrooke said:
    > @TSE
    >
    > you will be relieved to know I got an election leaflet from Labour and now have the chance to vote for Sion Simon as my MEP

    Sion Simon must be desperate for a job, surely the voters won't reject him again. Should be OK as number 2 on the list though.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,729
    > @Charles said:
    >
    > You need to decide when a foetus acquires the rights of a human. At the moment we have a more or less arbitrary date.
    >

    As I understand it, UK law does not assign rights to a foetus. Rights are acquired at birth.

    It makes abortion illegal (in most circumstances) beyond a certain time limit, not because the foetus has acquired the right to life at this date, but (I think) because there is a general sense that it offends people's sensibilities to have abortions at a later date. Sometimes an arbitrary fudge is the best compromise. We could do with rediscovering this with respect to Brexit.

    I don't think that tying abortion to viability as you have framed it is at all helpful. If technology develops to the extreme of supporting a fertilised egg to maturity then it risks criminalising women for miscarriages, as we can see with the law recently passed in Georgia.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 11,801
    -32p

    European Parliament voting intention:

    BREX: 30% (+3)
    LAB: 24% (-3)
    CON: 12% (-4)
    LDEM: 11% (+3)
    GRN: 6% (+2)
    CHUK: 4% (-)
    UKIP: 4% (-3)
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192
    Scott_P said:
    The Lib Dem’s increase their share by nearly a third while crappy old Farage can only manage a tenth!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,631
    edited May 15
    TGOHF said:
    A tease, nothing more. Any MP abstaining is not worthy of their position (dont laugh), it being second reading matters not.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 8,962
    I've realised the likely reason for us not receiving any party leaflets by post is that our names only went onto the electoral register on 1st May.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,114
    > @Charles said:
    > > @Charles said:
    >
    > > FPT
    >
    > > The problem with that (a position I struggle to improve on, I must admit), is that medical science keeps pushing back the point at which a pregnancy can be 'viable'. When we finally invent artificial wombs, it could be very early indeed.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > That's why I approach it as a question of rights.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > If a child is viable independent of the mother at - say - 10 weeks, then why should the mother be allowed to terminate its life?
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Equally, if the child is not viable then I can see an argument that the mother's rights have more sway because otherwise the mother is being forced to provide a "service" to the child
    >
    > >
    >
    > > If it were up to me, I'd legislate that abortion is legal up to the age of viability and then ask the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority to determine what that age is, with a provision that they review the matter every 10 years to keep up with medical science.
    >
    >
    >
    > There are other questions as well: many early term 'viable' babies have significant health issues, and that 'viability' is only there because of massive medical intervention.
    >
    > Yes - but I see that as a technical rather than a moral or political question which is why it is better to have an independent body determine it.

    I'd argue that it is very much a moral question.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,060
    > @OblitusSumMe said:
    > > @Charles said:
    > >
    > > You need to decide when a foetus acquires the rights of a human. At the moment we have a more or less arbitrary date.
    > >
    >
    > As I understand it, UK law does not assign rights to a foetus. Rights are acquired at birth.
    >
    > It makes abortion illegal (in most circumstances) beyond a certain time limit, not because the foetus has acquired the right to life at this date, but (I think) because there is a general sense that it offends people's sensibilities to have abortions at a later date. Sometimes an arbitrary fudge is the best compromise. We could do with rediscovering this with respect to Brexit.
    >
    > I don't think that tying abortion to viability as you have framed it is at all helpful. If technology develops to the extreme of supporting a fertilised egg to maturity then it risks criminalising women for miscarriages, as we can see with the law recently passed in Georgia.

    I don't think that's so. Inheritance law, for example, grants rights to a child in being; one can sue for injuries that have been done to you prior to your birth. I suppose you could say these are provisional rights, but they are rights.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,631
    Jonathan said:

    > @Nigel_Foremain said:

    > > @isam said:

    > > > @isam said:

    > >

    > > > If we revoke the Brexit Party may well lead the polls by January and Tommy Robinson and co will also become more prominent, if we No Deal the economy will take a major downturn and the Union could break apart

    > >

    > > >

    > >

    > > > My prediction a couple of years ago was that if MPs conspired to block Brexit and imprison Robinson they were setting up the perfect conditions to make Robinson a martyr and Farage a hero

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > > MPs don't imprison people, Sam.

    > >

    > > True, I should have said the establishment.

    >

    > Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?

    >

    > Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.



    Well said. It's yet another Brexit lie.

    Sadly yes. More of what is generally called the establishment may be for remain, but leave had plenty of establishment backers. Thats why nothing has passed.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 19,221

    I find myself in the position of hold my nose and vote since the so called "sensible" parties havent shown any ability to engage with large slices of the electorate.

    You are voting for TBP in the euros? Wow things have come to a pretty pass. What are you trying to achieve?

    As TMay continues to point out, we would have left by now if the loons hadn't scuppered it.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 7,217
    > @Brom said:
    > > @Nigel_Foremain said:
    > > > @isam said:
    > > > Ah, "the Establishment". Would you say that the Old Etonians, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are not part of said "Establishment"? What about Nigel Farage (then pronounced Farridge), a son of a stockbroker who went to Dulwich School (where he is alleged to have been turned down as a prefect for having racist and fascist views), who then became a commodities broker?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Funny how all the far right Brexit fanatics look rather more "Establishment" than those opposing their madness.
    > > >
    > > > The political establishment of the last 20 years.
    > >
    > > Boris The Idiot and Rees-Mogg, and for that matter Farridge ARE very much part of the 20 year old political Establishment. You don't get much more Establishment than being (or wannabe, as was failure Farage) a Tory MP FFS!
    >
    > I don't know if you're joking but not everyone who goes to private school is part of the establishment. I went to a state school but don't have a chip on my shoulder like yourself regarding those who received a decent education. Politicians should be judged on their actions and how capable they are of interacting with the electorate rather than decisions taken by their parents.

    So, if Boris, Rees-Mogg and Farage aren't 'establishment' who is?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 8,962
    > @dixiedean said:
    > Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.

    We need a new folk devil / moral panic every week. This week it is Mr Kyle's turn.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 127
    > @Charles said:
    > You need to decide when a foetus acquires the rights of a human. At the moment we have a more or less arbitrary date.
    >
    > Viability - I think you may have interpreted my post as relating to fertilisation or implantation? - is when a foetus can survive (with medical support) independent of the mother. If that is the case why should it not have rights?

    I think you may have misread my entire post!

    It should not have rights if it is not a person. If one could take a blastocyst and support its survival independent of the mother, as is conceivably possible in the future, you would still be starting with a blastocyst. It would be nonsense to give rights to a microscopic ball of cells. Ergo, viability (with medical support) is the wrong test.

    > (I’m not a doctor, but I think it’s around 20/21 weeks on current science vs 24 weeks as the legal cut off)

    This is all a massive red herring. Almost no abortions happen that late. Only 1% of abortions happen beyond 21 weeks and those are in very particular circumstances.

    As for viability, no, it's not at 20/21 weeks. With current medical science, between 0-3% of births at 22 weeks survive. The shortest known gestation at birth to survive is 21 weeks and 5 days. The standard definition of viability is a 50% survival rate, and that's 24 weeks, which is the GB legal cut-off.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,631
    TOPPING said:

    I find myself in the position of hold my nose and vote since the so called "sensible" parties havent shown any ability to engage with large slices of the electorate.

    As TMay continues to point out, we would have left by now if the loons hadn't scuppered it.
    And as bad as she is they can do nothing but dissemble when that is pointed out. Even JRM accepts May's path is still leaving.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,631

    > @dixiedean said:

    > Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.



    We need a new folk devil / moral panic every week. This week it is Mr Kyle's turn.

    Indeed.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,729
    > @Sean_F said:
    >
    > I don't think that's so. Inheritance law, for example, grants rights to a child in being; one can sue for injuries that have been done to you prior to your birth. I suppose you could say these are provisional rights, but they are rights.

    That's interesting. Are they tied to a particular date before birth, or is the simple fact of existence sufficient?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,060
    > @OblitusSumMe said:
    > > @Sean_F said:
    > >
    > > I don't think that's so. Inheritance law, for example, grants rights to a child in being; one can sue for injuries that have been done to you prior to your birth. I suppose you could say these are provisional rights, but they are rights.
    >
    > That's interesting. Are they tied to a particular date before birth, or is the simple fact of existence sufficient?

    I think that such rights arise at conception.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,960
    TOPPING said:

    I find myself in the position of hold my nose and vote since the so called "sensible" parties havent shown any ability to engage with large slices of the electorate.

    You are voting for TBP in the euros? Wow things have come to a pretty pass. What are you trying to achieve?

    As TMay continues to point out, we would have left by now if the loons hadn't scuppered it.
    The same reason Alanbrooke supported Brexit in the first place. He wants to punish mainstream politicians.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 5,878
    > @williamglenn said:
    > I find myself in the position of hold my nose and vote since the so called "sensible" parties havent shown any ability to engage with large slices of the electorate.
    >
    > You are voting for TBP in the euros? Wow things have come to a pretty pass. What are you trying to achieve?
    >
    > As TMay continues to point out, we would have left by now if the loons hadn't scuppered it.
    >
    > The same reason Alanbrooke supported Brexit in the first place. He wants to punish mainstream politicians.

    Isn't the problem that you actually damage mainstream people?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,746
    Nigelb said:

    Any of our military/foreign policy types have any idea what's going on with the US and Iran right now ?



    Spain pulling out of the US naval force in the Gulf over 'policy differences', and now this...

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/15/us-embassy-iraq-evacuation-1324931



    Feels ominous.

    CVN-72 (Abraham Lincoln) was scheduled to transfer from the Atlantic fleet to the Pacific going the long way round. A CVN can transit the Suez despite not being strictly SUEZMAX compliant (no locks on the Suez) but not the Panama. A Spanish frigate was joining the CSG for this deployment but the Lincoln was retasked to the gulf leaving the Stennis in the Med. This was completely contrary to what had been agreed with Spanish navy so they wisely pulled out.

    The Lincoln can't stay on station in the gulf indefinitely (we did 72 days on the Vinson) and the Spanish may rejoin when the CSG moves on to the Indian Ocean.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 11,948
    > @kle4 said:
    > > @dixiedean said:
    >
    > > Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.
    >
    >
    >
    > We need a new folk devil / moral panic every week. This week it is Mr Kyle's turn.
    >
    > Indeed.

    That being said. A man has died. It's good people think again.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 53,591
    > @SandyRentool said:
    > > @dixiedean said:
    > > Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.
    >
    > We need a new folk devil / moral panic every week. This week it is Mr Kyle's turn.
    >
    >

    Danny Baker last week.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,891
    > @SandyRentool said:
    > > @dixiedean said:
    > > Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.
    >
    > We need a new folk devil / moral panic every week. This week it is Mr Kyle's turn.
    >
    >

    Yep.
  • BromBrom Posts: 1,578
    > @Pulpstar said:
    > > @SandyRentool said:
    > > > @dixiedean said:
    > > > Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.
    > >
    > > We need a new folk devil / moral panic every week. This week it is Mr Kyle's turn.
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Danny Baker last week.

    Very true. Kick something when its down, yet ignore it until it becomes fashionable to hate it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,537
    edited May 15
    There’s never been such a media focus on a European election before, nor has there ever been a Euro election with a clear defining issue that everyone can relate to. I expect to see turnout surprising on the upside.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,009
    > @SandyRentool said:
    > > @dixiedean said:
    > > Off topic. But how come everyone has suddenly decided Jeremy Kyle is "a bad thing"? It has been on for 14 years, and hasn't changed much. The fact that someone has died now means people seem to have noticed it. My only surprise is it has gone on so long before the worst happened.
    >
    > We need a new folk devil / moral panic every week. This week it is Mr Kyle's turn.
    >
    >

    Certainly. Newspapers need to fill their columns and there's all those 24 hour news channels which have to pretend that something newsworthy happens every 5 minutes or so.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,584
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Still don't know how I'm voting.

    Maybe I'll spoil my ballot with an F1 tip.
  • TudorRoseTudorRose Posts: 1,245
    > @IanB2 said:
    > There’s never been such a media focus on a European election before, nor has there ever been a Euro election with a clear defining issue that everyone can relate to. I expect to see turnout surprising on the upside.
    -------------------

    Ironically we could end up with a turnout that is higher than for some countries that are remaining in the EU.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,259
    I see TPD's disloyalty knows no bounds :o
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 26,078
    I understood that he caucused with the Conservatives after UKIP but that they wouldn't let him back in.
  • TrèsDifficileTrèsDifficile Posts: 448


    So, if Boris, Rees-Mogg and Farage aren't 'establishment' who is?

    You need to have institutional authority to be part of "the Establishment". Boris had it when he was Foreign Sec; what institutional authority do JRM and NF have, or have they ever had?
  • isamisam Posts: 27,192

    I understood that he caucused with the Conservatives after UKIP but that they wouldn't let him back in.
    That was Douglas ‘not the value at 4/6 in the by Election’ Carswell wasn’t it?
This discussion has been closed.